5 ms·
Isn't it the opposite? The public auction went to the highest bidder. It turns out this spectrum is far more valuable for terrestrial use ($81billion paid for
by AnotherGoodName 5y ago
Isn't it the opposite? The public auction went to the highest bidder.
It turns out this spectrum is far more valuable for terrestrial use ($81billion paid for it) than it was for satellite use. So the satellite users are being kicked off it since they couldn't pay that amount.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- pianoben 5y agoTo me, this reads as "the telcos wanted the spectrum for themselves, and muscled out the satellite providers with the help of their inside man". If you consider the spectrum's value to be fairly represented by what telcos paid, and that the societal value of the spectrum is best realized by those who can pay the most, then sure, this represents the optimal outcome. I don't necessarily believe either of those two points - but that's why I'm asking here, because I don't really have a good grounding in the facts.